Comments on: Bulletproof Teflon Patent Infringers http://abev.wordpress.com/2007/11/28/bulletproof-teflon-patent-infringers/ An overly eclectic, likely inconsequent[ial], and blatantly fo[w]l blog on life, family, literature, law, and religion. Fri, 03 May 2013 17:11:41 +0000 hourly 1 http://wordpress.com/ By: Jordan F. http://abev.wordpress.com/2007/11/28/bulletproof-teflon-patent-infringers/#comment-8271 Thu, 29 Nov 2007 15:13:39 +0000 http://abev.wordpress.com/2007/11/28/bulletproof-teflon-patent-infringers/#comment-8271 I agree regarding most “software patents.” During the 1990s, the PTO was handing out “software patents” like candy. Now, courts across the country are finding many such patents invalid.

]]> By: Mark D. http://abev.wordpress.com/2007/11/28/bulletproof-teflon-patent-infringers/#comment-8266 Thu, 29 Nov 2007 05:36:45 +0000 http://abev.wordpress.com/2007/11/28/bulletproof-teflon-patent-infringers/#comment-8266 I think the patent system is a net drag on the economy, particular in the realm of software. Software patents are typically so general they shouldn’t be granted at all.

In other fields, Congress could restore sanity by changing to a compulsory licensing scheme, with maximum recovery set to some healthy multiple of development costs or $100,000, whichever is greater. After that the patent would go into the public domain.

]]> By: Stephen M (Ethesis) http://abev.wordpress.com/2007/11/28/bulletproof-teflon-patent-infringers/#comment-8260 Wed, 28 Nov 2007 22:56:48 +0000 http://abev.wordpress.com/2007/11/28/bulletproof-teflon-patent-infringers/#comment-8260 I’ve always thought that infringement should be treated as a 5th amendment taking without compensation, and that infringers dealing with the state of California ought to be able to purchase from those the state had sued the claims that others had against the state and to pay them with those.

]]>